T hiselton-Dyer . — Morphological Notes . 783 
the carpophyll of Cycas is the simplest we know : we fold 
it like a sheet of note-paper, and we get an arrangement 
which does not differ essentially from a pea-pod. But in the 
majority of Phanerogams, a carpel of this simple type is lost 
sight of in the complexity of adaptive arrangements, and 
a subsidiary structure — the placenta — is called into existence 
to bear the ovules. 
It seems to me that the Gymnosperms having assisted 
us to grasp the generalized structure underlying the complex 
arrangements of the Phanerogams, we must use great caution 
in the attempt to find in the former the specialized structures 
developed in the latter. Nevertheless the history of Gymno- 
spermous morphology shows a constant attempt to bring it 
forcibly into line with that of Phanerogams. 
The most recent view as to the nature of the seminiferous 
scale in Abietineae proper is that of Goebel (Outlines of Classi- 
fication and Special Morphology, p. 328). He lays stress on 
the fact that in Abies ‘the seminiferous scale arises as a 
protuberance on the base of the so-called bract-scale and 
therefore is not axillary.’ I must confess, however, that 
vegetable morphology presents us with so many cases of 
similar dislocations that the mere fact taken alone does not 
strike me as of great importance. I am disposed to agree 
with Van Tieghem that it merely depends on ‘ intercalary 
growth ’ such as ‘ separates a dialypetalous corolla from a 
gamopetalous one.’ If this is the correct view, as I believe 
it to be, Goebel’s theory that ‘the seminiferous scale’ must 
‘ be regarded as a placenta of large dimensions growing out 
of a carpellary leaf 1 seems to be without a valid argument 
to support it. And in Pinns , where the seminiferous scale 
is truly axillary, Goebel admits that it cannot be considered 
an outgrowth, though he still thinks it may be considered 
a placental growth. 
If the seminiferous scale is not a placenta or outgrowth 
from the bract-scale, which in that case would be a carpel, 
it must be some kind of foliar organ. Lindley was satisfied 
‘ that the scales of the cones really are metamorphosed leaves ’ 
